Posted by Bob Jonkman on 2nd October 2013

Luddite Memorial, Liversedge
The pervasive expectation of HTML everywhere came to light in a recent e-mail exchange:
Him: Bob, have a look at this video: LOLcats at work
Me: Did you intend to send a link with that?
Him: Yes, here it is: LOLcats at work
Me: Sorry, still no link. Remember, I don’t receive HTML e-mail…
Him: Wut? I’ve never heard of someone not receiving HTML e-mail!
E-mail was never designed for HTML; it is intended to be a plain-text medium. HTML is merely cobbled on, and mail clients have no standard way to render HTML messages, resulting in different displays on different mail programs. Some mail programs, especially those run from the command line, can’t show HTML rendered messages at all.
Although I use a graphical mail client (Thunderbird), I choose to not display HTML for two reasons:
1) Security: HTML mail can have Javascript code or other objects embedded. That’s a great way to get virus infections on your computer. I don’t want any code running on my computer that I didn’t put there myself.
2) Privacy: HTML mail that links to external images allows the owner of those images to track your mail usage: When you open the mail, how often you open it, the location you open it at, what computer you’re using, and whether you forward it to others (and then, when they open the mail, how often, their location, &c).
Not to mention that HTML messages are far bigger than text messages, especially when the HTML contains embedded images, fonts, and other stuff. Now, that’s not such a big deal with fast connections, unlimited download caps, and cheap disk drives, but it will still make a difference on small-format devices like phones and watches.
That said, if you do send me HTML e-mail, be sure to embed any images or LOLcat videos. That way I can still view them as static attachments, without revealing when, where, and how often I view them.
For more info have a look at the Wikipedia article on HTML e-mail
–Bob.
You can send HTML e-mail to Bob Jonkman at bjonkman@sobac.com
The Luddite Memorial, Liversedge by Tim Green is used under a
Creative Commons — Attribution 2.0 Generic — CC BY 2.0 license.
Tags: attachment, bandwidth, cap, code, e-mail, email, expectation, HTML, image, Javascript, link, LOLcats, Luddite, plain-text, privacy, security, Thunderbird, video, virus
Posted in email, privacy, security | 1 Comment »
Posted by Bob Jonkman on 18th November 2010

autoroute à emails by Biscarotte
I administer a number of e-mail systems, and I’ve been seeing a lot of spam coming from Hotmail accounts recently. And both friends and clients have been telling me that it’s not them who are sending spam from Hotmail (and ending up in my e-mail systems), their accounts have been hacked. One person asked me:
Is it just Hotmail? What else could I use? Can’t I just change my password?
Changing passwords is only an effective solution if the account was compromised by social engineering, eg. the legitimate user giving out the password in a phishing attempt or other direct means, or if a simple password was guessed or cracked.
There is evidence that Hotmail and Yahoo’s password recovery mechanism is flawed (eg. the Sarah Palin breach), so that malusers can acquire a new password for an account. I don’t think this is happening, because victims are not reporting being locked out of their accounts. Of course, if the service merely sends out the current password then this may be what is happening, and no amount of password complexity will protect the account.
If the passwords were compromised by an automated password cracker then I would expect only simple passwords to be breached, and accounts with strong passwords would be safe. I do not know what kind of passwords were in use by the people who have compromised accounts, but it is likely they were simple passwords.
While I have no evidence, I think the current rash of breaches is due to a more systematic attack by URL munging, or fuzzing the inputs on a POST request, or some other attack vector. These attacks do not require an authenticated login, and in that case no amount of password complexity will provide security either.
I haven’t heard of similar compromised accounts in Gmail, so that may be a suitable alternative for now. I’ve been recommending that people use the mail accounts provided by their ISPs, largely so that they can make use of the ISP’s technical support if their accounts do get compromised. And, of course, if they’re paying their ISP for a mail account then there may be immunity from liability (“My mail account was compromised and I was paying my ISP for security, so all this spam is their fault”).
–Bob.
Update 5 Feb 2012: I retract the first sentence in the last paragraph. E-mail Administrator friends have been telling me that Google Mail is just as vulnerable as Hotmail and Yahoo. Having just read “Hacked!” in The Atlantic I’m convinced the problem of compromised mail accounts is worse than I thought, and that no online providers (especially the “free” ones) adequately protect the e-mail of their users.
autoroute à emails by Biscarotte is used under a Creative Commons by-sa-v2.0 license.
Tags: breach, complexity, compromised, email, gmail, hotmail, malusers, malware, password, Sarah Palin, social engineering, spam, yahoo mail
Posted in email, Internet, spam | 1 Comment »